independence
Regular Member
You do know you just admitted to committing a crime, correct?
See TCA 39-17-1359
Like I say, you are incorrect on this. Here is the entire text of TCA 39-17-1359 as found at http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/tncode/ along with my comments, which are in bold. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Seek legal counsel for authoritative clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
39-17-1359. Prohibition at certain meetings -- Posting notice.
(a) (1) Except as provided in § 39-17-1313, an individual, corporation, business entity or local, state or federal government entity or agent thereof is authorized to prohibit the possession of weapons by any person who is at a meeting conducted by, or on property owned, operated, or managed or under the control of the individual, corporation, business entity or government entity.
(2) The prohibition in subdivision (a)(1) shall apply to any person who is authorized to carry a firearm by authority of § 39-17-1351.
(b) (1) Notice of the prohibition permitted by subsection (a) shall be accomplished by displaying one (1) or both of the notices described in subdivision (b)(3) in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited. Either form of notice used shall be of a size that is plainly visible to the average person entering the building, property, or portion of the building or property, posted. ...So it doesn't count unless it is at all primary entrances, etc. Note that it also says that either one of the 2 posting methods about to be outlined below are legally binding. Here comes the first method...
(2) The notice required by this section shall be in English, but a duplicate notice may also be posted in any language used by patrons, customers or persons who frequent the place where weapon possession is prohibited.
(3) (A) If a sign is used as the method of posting, it shall contain language substantially similar to the following:
AS AUTHORIZED BY T.C.A. § 39-17-1359, POSSESSION OF A WEAPON ON POSTED PROPERTY OR IN A POSTED BUILDING IS PROHIBITED AND IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE. ...Is "No firearms on premises" "substantially similar" to this? No it is not, as we see below.
(B) As used in this section, "language substantially similar to" means the sign contains language plainly stating that:
(i) The property is posted under authority of Tennessee law; ...Does "No firearms on premises" meet this requirement? No it does not.
(ii) Weapons or firearms are prohibited on the property, in the building, or on the portion of the property or building that is posted; and ...Does "No firearms on premises" meet this requirement? Maybe, but read on to the other requirements, noting that ALL these requirements must be met for the sign to be legally binding.
(iii) Possessing a weapon in an area that has been posted is a criminal offense. ...Does "No firearms on premises" meet this requirement? It certainly does not. And now comes the second possible method involving a "circle and slash" which is also legally binding...
(C) A building, property or a portion of a building or property, shall be considered properly posted in accordance with this section if one (1) or both of the following is displayed in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited:
(i) The international circle and slash symbolizing the prohibition of the item within the circle; or
(ii) The posting sign described in this subdivision (b)(3).
(c) (1) It is an offense to possess a weapon in a building or on property that is properly posted in accordance with this section.
(2) Possession of a weapon on posted property in violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only of five hundred dollars ($500).
(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, reduce or eliminate any civil or criminal liability that a property owner or manager may have for injuries arising on their property.
(e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to title 70 regarding wildlife laws, rules and regulations.
(f) This section shall not apply to the grounds of any public park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway, waterway or other similar public place that is owned or operated by the state, a county, a municipality or instrumentality thereof. The carrying of firearms in those areas shall be governed by § 39-17-1311. ...Bonus: Be sure you read 1311 before assuming that you can't carry in a park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you can see that gurn is breaking no laws by carrying there. Many here at OCDO would disapprove of him giving them his business at all though.